George Lakoff - Do Souls Exist?: Exploring Human Identity

[@starlord184]

Consider the following analogy: a ship on the ocean. It has a motor, steering and fuel supply. It also has senses: radar for sight, sonar for hearing and a radio for communication. For all intents it kind of sounds like a person. Does it have a soul? Intrinsically, no. But in a way, yes. The captain comes aboard, starts the engine, turns on the equipment and sails away. The ship "comes alive". The captain becomes the soul of the ship. Can this "soul" see, yes. Can it hear, yes. Can it communicate, yes. But, to the ship, it can do none of these things since the “soul” doesn’t have radar, it can’t see. Without sonar it can’t hear. And without a radio it obviously can’t communicate. A ship is a lifeless entity without a captain. The captain provides purpose and direction for the ship. Similarly, it is the case with people. A body is a lifeless entity without a soul. This is characteristic of a lot of such arguments. Everything is constrained to fit within certain parameters and alternatives (sometimes wildly speculative ideas) are ignored.

[@slyjokerg]

All you are doing is redefining "soul" into existence. That isn't what anyone means by "soul" in such a discussion. They are talking about a living supernatural, magical element of an entity that continues to exist after a person dies. It is childish nonsense.

[@maheshdaggolaa5652]

Our body and brain are stuck in 4 dimensions, through which we can only make sense of our surroundings and self. Universal Consciousness, Souls are extra dimensions which can only be experienced in an altered state. When you connect to these extra dimensions, you become awakened and you will start seeing people as one energy.

[@AMorgan57]

We have evolved with the help of an instinct to imagine ourselves as having some sort of elevated existential status. Thank you, Dr. Lakoff, for your honesty and insight.

we imagine lots of stuff. most of it isn't real.

[@jeffryblair6816]

Who is exactly is it who is imagining?

@@jeffryblair6816 lots of stuff. can you read? you probably imagined that was a coherent comment.

[@jeffryblair6816]

Very clever. Yes, I could have been clearer. My point is that if there is no diachronic “I” which is a genuine knower, a mind, a soul, a spirit, whatever you want to call a center of consciousness, and if one posits that consciousness is an illusion, then WHO is experiencing the illusion? The position that consciousness is an illusion is incoherent, as it requires a consciousness to be fooled.

@@jeffryblair6816 lol wut? everyone has a "mind". Souls and spirits are fiction. Nobody said consciousness is an illusion. You are just piling up straw men.

[@danielnofal]

I am amazed how many people instead of understanding a very reasonable explanation dismisses it, provides no alternative, just insults the man for being “materialistic”, whatever that means.

[@justinhartnell6779]

Yes, what does that mean?

@@justinhartnell6779 how many is four?

[@justinhartnell6779]

Huh?

[@dongshengdi773]

Materialistic means you based your analysis which are limited only to physical material things . Materialism has already been debunked, therefore his analysis is wrong

[@danielnofal]

@@dongshengdi773 really? “Has been debunked” is quite a strong statement with no evidence at all. Perhaps you can cite a source, preferably from this world.

[@surendrakverma555]

Thanks for posting useful information 😊

[@leoborganelli]

This guy is brilliant. Thank you for having him on.....

[@micheldisclafani2343]

The soul is the memory transmitted by both parents to the conceived creature. It contains different forms of inherited characters from the parents and gran, gran parents, plus a clear guide to develop in due time, mentally and physically. The soul is the base of the body and of the mind, constantly evolving with the experience of the living human being. This is, in principle ,no different for animals and plants.

[@catherinemira75]

@@micheldisclafani2343 👍

he asserted, with no evidence whatsoever. What we inherit from past life forms is genes, which create arms and legs and brains. no soul required.

[@callmeishmael3031]

Some might argue that the soul provides the free will that enlivens the body enabling the soul to experience a lifetime.

this of course applies to beetles as much as humans

[@slyjokerg]

Some might argue that Narnia is a really cool place.

[@callmeishmael3031]

In my last lifetime, I was a beetle in Narnia and I had a really cool time.

[@catherinemira75]

So a blind person, a deaf person or a person who's had a stroke has no soul, or possibly less 'soul' than a fully able bodied person? If we consider our lives to be a transformational journey through time, a specific story that each one of us has, then a soul is, imo, what's left at the end of that journey, what we identify with and recognize as ours. Whether this inevitable transformation is going to carry on after death is another story, as it were.

there's no such thing as a soul what a silly idea

[@catherinemira75]

Prove it.

[@slyjokerg]

What is your evidence that a soul exists?

[@catherinemira75]

@@slyjokerg I haven't said that there's a proof, only that I believe that the possibility exists. You want proofs. You need proofs : I know that's a fool's errand. However, it is worth exploring possibilities.

[@slyjokerg]

​@@catherinemira75 ---> POSTED: **I haven't said that there's a proof...** You didn't pay attention. I asked for evidence, not for you to prove it. **only that I believe that the possibility exists.** What is your evidence that it is possible? Something not being proven to be impossible doesn't automatically mean it is possible. **You want proofs.** I want evidence. That's the first step. You haven't tried to provide any. You are simply making a complaint about something I didn't ask for so that you can use it as an excuse to evade what I DID say. **You need proofs : I know that's a fool's errand.** Again, I didn't ask you to prove anything. I asked for evidence that souls exists. If you can't provide any at all, then no one needs to even begin to take it seriously. **However, it is worth exploring possibilities.** And how would that be done?

[@jerrymeadows5059]

This argument is like deconstructing a fully loaded automobile to see if a driver exists.

it's more like deconstructing the driver

[@jerrymeadows5059]

No. According to his argument the driver doesn't exist as a separate identifiable unit, but is a collection of identifiable and inter-connected neuron flashes instead of a single entity which has a say in why and to what extent the neurons flash. He doesn't say that some event triggers anger, he points out where in the brain anger begins as though that is proof that there is no soul and that anger merely erupts, even as the degree of anger an individual expresses is variable. In other words he doesn't address anything about whether or not the soul exists but instead attempts to explain how certain reactions are effected, therefore he doesn't address the question about the existence of a soul, but leaves it understood, in his mind, that there is no soul, there is only reaction.

@@jerrymeadows5059 no the driver is the driver, which uses its brain to drive the car. no soul needed.

[@jerrymeadows5059]

I'm not arguing for the existence of a soul, I'm just wondering why the belief that this driver using "its" brain to drive the car is, according to his argument effectively a non-entity in light of where about "its" brain or whatever the neurons flash. His argument, as well as yours, is entirely materialistic which without proof is an insistence that the possibility there is something other than material as a fundamental "driver" of the universe is wrong because we already know all there is to know about existence and it is ludicrous to believe that the "driver" is not entirely materialistic since material is fundamentally all there is. Perhaps you and he are right, but it's troublesome to think that a lot of people much smarter than me can be so unimaginative as to believe they understand everything based upon a few apparent laws that have been devised by other "drivers" while living on this insignificant little planet in an insignificant little galaxy.

[@jerrymeadows5059]

Good, we agree. The driver is the driver, but you're saying it is as well the car.

[@filmesndependentes4816]

Nice point of view!

[@iain9821]

What is a proactive response to this question? If I say, Yes, souls exist, what action should I take? If I say, No, souls do not exist, what action should I take? How does the quality of the action that stems from the answer reflect on the accuracy of the answer?

[@slyjokerg]

The answer is... there is no evidence for any such childish, cartoonish, fairy tale "thing" as a soul.

[@raretunes6259]

SOULS are real, only the term soul is inappropriate, a misnomer. In my opinion, “electricity capable of thought and action” is us - in our life after human life, the afterlife. Whether our true ego is immortal is beyond my knowledge. But it would be possible. - Thank you for your great channel and the variety of topics!

[@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038]

"Opinion" is the operative word here. Belief would also be appropriate. Neither are based on any verifiable facts but are the result of nothing but woefully uninformed fiction & superstition. You also seem to lack any understanding of electricity, my career field. And you don't seem to know what the word "ego" means. Ego: "the self; that which feels, acts, or thinks," upon death there is no mind therefore no self.

[@MrMichiel1983]

That's already called "mind" and is not immortal by definition, virtuous on needing a substrate such as electricity presents in your own definition.

[@raretunes6259]

​@@MrMichiel1983 Maybe you're right, maybe you're not. Perhaps there is no mind/spirit at all, but an energy existing in or around us (invisible to our eyes) that dissolves after our earthly death. And that is then still us, but in our original form, without a troublesome body. While I was writing my comment, I was also thinking about the 1st law of thermodynamics, and therefore I believe that souls/energy beings are immortal.

[@slyjokerg]

You are ANOTHER person who is changing the definition of "soul" into something that exists so that you can rationalize believing/saying that souls exists. It is a straw man. That isn't what people mean when they talk about souls.

[@TheEivindBerge]

The property of the soul is that it is yours. Of course the body imbues all those other properties, but we need a way to explain the uniqueness of your consciousness. Something which does not repeat in other bodies or brains, even a perfectly identical one. So unless you are a transcendental solipsist, there is something very unique here which has an essential property. None of the hypothetical changes to the body can discount that.

[@catherinemira75]

@@TheEivindBerge the mind and emotions also are unique to each individual as they occur in time and space

each person has unique genes and experiences. So yes we are each unique. So what?

[@TheEivindBerge]

You sound like a zombie. Never wondered if you have a unique consciousness?

[@slyjokerg]

You just said: "Blah, blah, blah-blah blah, yada yada, blah blah, blah."

[@TheEivindBerge]

@@slyjokerg Ok, but you said even less.

[@angel4everable]

The Other George, on the soul: "Reared for thousands of years on the notion that the individual survives, man has got to make a considerable psychological effort to get used to the notion that the individual perishes. He is not likely to salvage civilization unless he can evolve a system of good and evil which is independent of heaven and hell". George Orwell

[@MrMichiel1983]

Indeed, any good action is its own reward... not some currency for an alleged afterlife. So maybe it is true that humans can't build heaven for themselves, but we sure can build it for each other. Plus, if I must indulge religious people, an omnipotent God should well be able to make a morality that can exist independently of it, so claiming morality can only come from the existence of God is sort of blasphemous.

@@MrMichiel1983 forget heaven just live today as best you can

[@undertalefanyay5728]

Agreed but it’s not working too well yet. Maybe we do not survive.

[@crapton9002]

It's a tribal brainwashing technique millenia old. Hypothesis (myth) isn't truth. Believers have the equivalent of Stockholm syndrome.

[@slyjokerg]

THE George that should be quoted on this matter is Carlin.

[@dondattaford5593]

The soul is what creates thought the soul feels the soul is the love of lifes experiences

nope that's the brain

[@Steven-yd2ji]

How does the brain love life's experiences as a lump of matter?

@@Steven-yd2ji How? It just does. The universe doesn't owe us an explanation. And inventing an imaginary "soul" doesn't answer anything.

[@Steven-yd2ji]

Non-answer. Just say you don't know.

@@Steven-yd2ji That's not what I said. I said it's a dumb question. There is no basis for your assumption that a "reason" that is satisfying to you exists.

[@MichaelDembinski]

"Could the soul see?" George - just ask anyone who's had an out-of-body experience or near death experience. And - more mundanely - if we need eyes to see, how do we experience sight during a dream? That red double-decker bus was clearly driving through Paris with me sitting next to my late father as we were on our way to Warsaw...

[@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038]

😂

[@rudysimoens570]

The brain is capable of producing the strangest hallucinations while we are asleep and especially when the brain is under extreme stress or when people have taken drugs!

[@dondattaford5593]

Great analogy

imagining things in your head isn't the same thing as seeing.

[@alexale5488]

Also blind people from birth claim to have experienced sight. Also, DMT users who are blind claim to have had visual sensations.

[@bornin54]

That was spot on

[@jeffryblair6816]

Wow. Mr Lakoff seems to be omniscient! He knows all of the possibilities that could exist. I love his book, Metaphors We Live By, but this talk is pretty much pure hubris.

[@Earthad23]

Mistaking “things” for the proxies that can be measured is a fundamental error in thinking.

imagining things that aren't real is also an error in thinking.

[@Earthad23]

Like what? Things like momentum? Conservation of mass? All metaphors

[@stephengentile4989]

Lakoff confines the possible soul attributes to biological brain function. Well, that's quite an unwarranted assumption.

[@williamburts3114]

Bro, in truth Isn't that what all scientists do. They "assume"

[@deanodebo]

100%. He’s assuming it as if he knows

true he didn't just make up bs

[@slyjokerg]

The unwarranted assumption is any belief at all that you are still alive after you die.

[@deanodebo]

@@slyjokerg do you have a soul?

[@michaelmckinney7240]

In order to answer the question "Do souls exist" we need to define as far as possible what we mean by the word "soul" while accepting that no definitive answer is ever achievable. Let's peel away the outer layers of this riddle and see where it might lead us. A different way to pose this question might be; do you believe there is a part of your being that survives the death of your body? This question is contingent on how another question is posed and answered. That being; do you believe that a supreme being is at the heart of all existent reality? A qualifying stipulation must be inserted here. The question of God's or the souls existence can only be tentatively answered by an unflinching analysis of what empirical evidence suggests. We cannot equate anecdotal references from the bible as being "proof" of the soul's existence despite its dogmatic claims. This book also advises believers to murder homosexuals. (Leviticus) The bible is poison to the human mind, and actually undermines legitimate curiosity about what constitutes ultimate reality. Let's get beyond scriptural dogma. Even though I am an ardent theist, my opposition to traditional religion requires this strident language. If we accept the existence of a supreme being whose attributes are in accordance with traditional definitions that include being all powerful and pure spirit, definitions that are commonly shared by Christian and non Christian believers, then it's not an unreasonable leap to say that we also are essentially spiritual beings. Is this the same as saying we have souls? If so, does my soul have a particular identity similar to my individual personality? Can the soul be thought of as a version or permutation of spirit, nondescript, and impersonal being wedded and individualized to the distinct and particularized experience of my life and the events that indelibly shaped it? If this were the case it would mean that my soul is somehow affected or altered by individual experience and is changeable. Yet if we think of the soul as eternal and unalterable, this definition seems inappropriate. What's the answer? When people ponder their coming death, a certain unease usually creeps into their thoughts. It's common to hope and prefer that we will continue onward, not as an anonymous parcel of spiritual energy, but as an intact human personality with all the collected personal memories collected over a lifetime. This is the hope, desire and for many the expectation of what's waiting for them. If this is what happens post death, then it's hard to imagine anything other than a soul customized and tailored to retain the particular experiences of an individuals life and personal history. We are so firmly attached to our lives that any thought of being permanently separated from it with no connecting thoughts or memories of that life is for many completely unacceptable. In order to prevent consideration of this intolerable possibility we are told by some that we are all possessed of an individual soul that is ours alone, that knows our name and personal experience, and through this individualized soul our personality and life history will be preserved. This is very comforting, but it's based on an illusion. I don't need the minutia and detailed history of my life to carry beyond death. What purpose would it serve? Most of it is irrelevant. Do you remember the foibles and miscues of your teen age years? I hope not. They no longer have any bearing on your life. Let's say I die and before I die, I express the hope that I'll see my mother who died years before. The reason is I want to thank her for the love and support she showed me as a child and an adult. In other words I want to show love and gratitude in return for the love that was freely shown to me. However, that love and support I received as a child didn't originate with my mother, because she was also shown love by her mother and so on backward through time. My mother "chose" to express that love as did her mother etc.. When I die, that part of me that survives death will encounter universal love from which the love my mother freely offered me was derived. This is where the particular and the universal meet. My particular experience of being loved by my mother was and is only possible by and through a universal source of love that transcends any and all partial and derivative experience of that love. The concept of what we call "soul" is an attempt to marry the particular to the universal by personalizing the general idea of "spirit" to conform with our temporal experience. However, it's not the particularity of our individual experience that will survive, it's our general inclination to move closer to the source of ultimate reality that will endure. This doesn't answer the basic question, and if what we call the soul is our subconscious desire to continue this "first person experience" into what we hope lies beyond death then it's existence is unlikely. The problem becomes, once we grant that God exists and that he is pure spirit, pure consciousness, and pure being, what then is our connection to this transcendent reality? If it's not through a "soul" what could it be? We're beginning to nudge against a wall where certain questions are unanswerable, but the recurring and most intuitively sensible answer remains. Our connection to pure spirit is and can only be by and through that selfsame spirit, and our connection to universal consciousness can only be through that an ever deeper immersion into universal consciousness.

there's no such thing as gods or souls. when you die you die. That is 100% proved by medical science.

[@zebonautsmith1541]

Precisely. He nailed it.

[@justinhartnell6779]

He nailed it alright.

[@lutzresource7239]

Oh, wow. This is where we are?

[@S3RAVA3LM]

To posit if something 'exists' also implies a background of what does not exist, therefore that which does exist has being, too, is becoming, and participates in the temporal and spatial. Though this being came through the soul, it's not the soul that is subject to time and space..so the soul does not exist. For those proud nihilists i simply ask for what is your model, explication and exposition of how all this works? In ^ such an inquiry is where the soul is realized. There can be no other way. And ultimately it is the 'good news'. Believing that chickens and trees brought themselves into existence is no default belief i would believe. The tree or seed; chicken or the egg? The theories of soul, aether, God, are very much debated, and hypothesis there are shown to be wrong....the fact is, God is, and so is aether, and so is soul, the only thing we can refute are the theories of. For such are principles. They can not be denied. And if one so claims they can be denied must give a scrupulous demonstration of. For God is the PRIMORDIAL CAUSE, THE CAUSE OF ALL causes, the aether is true pure potential and energy, soul is like a medium between spirit and matter. Denying God or soul because they're not object is fallacy. It's not logical. For in true inquiry one will realize that such a Cause could never have been begotten. There can be no other way.

[@williamburts3114]

He asks, what do you need a body for? Answer: The body and its senses are needed for the self or soul to experience material sense gratification, therefore in relation to the self it's just an instrument used for that purpose. Thus, its value and purpose is in relation to the self and not unto itself. And that is why the "soul" is defined as the essence of man.

there is no reason to think there is any such thing as a "soul" other than you want to.

[@williamburts3114]

unless of course you would be a person who has experience of an NDE or OBE

[@Jinxed007]

Just to show how easily and endlessly you can argue either side of the debate, one could say, "Souls don't hear, see, feel, or think like a corporeal being." On and on.

[@bustinjieber2673]

But how can a soul have a concious afterlife if it can't do all those things?

one can SAY anything but without evidence it isn't worth much

[@Jinxed007]

Exactly my point. There's no end to such questions.

[@Jinxed007]

@@bustinjieber2673 Well, you could say pretty much anything. You could say that souls do not receive or retain information the same way as their corporeal counterparts.

[@bustinjieber2673]

@@Jinxed007 I guess so.

[@BenStowell]

Maybe: the soul is pure subjectivity, the self-aware self that experiences and has consciousness. But the quality or 'suchness' of that consciousness depends on the brain. If the soul is pure subjectivity, then there is no free will, because the self has no control over its quality; it merely experiences the qualities given to it by the brain (and all that shaped the brain).

[@clovislyme6195]

I don't usually comment on your videos, because there is almost always something of value to take from them - but really whether one believes in a soul or not this is trite to the point of tedium and irrelevance.

[@Redant1Redant]

totally agree. He is assuming the consequent. He assumes the soul will have the same properties as a material body, but since it doesn't have the material mechanisms of a body, i.e., perception, it can't exist. That is, the soul is a non-material thing, but since it doesn't have material properties, that thing cannot exist. Ridiculous.

[@Ragner1234]

To me a "soul" is synonym to consciousness; a *field of pure information* extended into an individual originating from the universe itself. The soul returns into the infinite super-consciousness of the universe upon death of the physical body.

[@slyjokerg]

Consciousness isn't "information." Where people got this usage of "information" is beyond me. Information is what we take in, process, and learn. There isn't some magical "thing" that is "information" that simply exists, as if it is an apple or a tire. It is an abstract concept. And if you are going to define "soul" as being consciousness, then don't use the word soul. "Soul" implies the existence of a supernatural, metaphysical element to a person that outlives the person's body, as if they didn't actually die. It is similar to people who wish to define "god" as something other than a conscious entity that created the universe, listens to prayers, can affect anything it wants, etc. Trying to redefine words to mean something other than their ordinary usages defeats the very purpose of discussing the topics that those words customarily represent.

[@flolou8496]

As I listen to him around minute 5, It strikes me to consider a popular elevator pitch description of the soul as being the expression of your mind, will, and emotions, I would also add that the soul is the bridge between the physical and the spiritual, so it's really a combination of both, acting like an adaptor to bridge the entire identity experience: One last thing and this is very important, The Bible hints at our trinitarian anatomy in a very clear passage outlining the 3 parts of our identity as body, soul and spirit, where it says: Hebrews 4:12 King James Version 12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. (obviously there is no need to specifically reference the body specifically in the passage as that is already implied with the joints and marrow symbolism)

[@williamburts3114]

Soul is just another term that refers to "self"

it isn't. "self" is your body and brain. "soul" is bs.

[@williamburts3114]

His question was, what do you need a body for? Answer: You need it to experience material sense gratification, therefore the body is just an instrument for the self to experience sense gratification. Thus, its purpose and value are in relation to the self and not unto itself.

[@slyjokerg]

You are another person who is talking about a different subject by the very act of changing what people mean when they refer to a "soul." People aren't talking about merely one's "self" when they speak of "souls." They are speaking of a childish, ridiculous notion of there being some magical, mystical, supernatural part of a person that goes on living after the body dies. And it is nonsense.

[@williamburts3114]

@@slyjokerg People who have experienced NDE's and OBEs would disagree with you.

[@slyjokerg]

@@williamburts3114 Right. And anyone can disagree that the Earth is a spheroid or that Austin is the capital of Texas. Anyone can disagree with anything. It doesn't grant credence to their objection.

[@emilyminnow]

I’d love to see this guy debate David Chalmers…

[@realitycheck1231]

The body dictates that we are controlled by our senses The traditional five senses are: vision. hearing, taste, touch, smell. Beyond the Basics: Other Human Senses Balance: the vestibular system in your inner ear helps us detect our orientation in the gravitational field. Proprioception (body awareness): Close your eyes and touch your nose. You can thank proprioception for that. It's our ability to sense where our body parts are in relation to others. Internal senses: Our internal organs, like the bladder and large intestine, have sensors too. They let us know when it's time for a bathroom break or when we're hungry or thirsty. The body dictates that we are controlled by our senses. Thought is not defined as a basic or beyond the basic human sense. I don't know what the specific thought process would be without a body, but it's plausible.

[@realitycheck1231]

ACIM It is only the awareness of the body that makes love seem limited. ²For the body _is_ a limit on love. ³The belief in limited love was its origin, and it was made to limit the unlimited. ⁴Think not that this is merely allegorical, for it was made to limit _you._ ⁵Can you who see yourself within a body know yourself as an idea? ⁶Everything you recognize you identify with externals, something outside itself. ⁷You cannot even think of God without a body, or in some form you think you recognize. The body cannot know. ²And while you limit your awareness to its tiny senses, you will not see the grandeur that surrounds you. ³God cannot come into a body, nor can you join Him there. ⁴Limits on love will always seem to shut Him out, and keep you apart from Him. ⁵The body is a tiny fence around a little part of a glorious and complete idea. ⁶It draws a circle, infinitely small, around a very little segment of Heaven, splintered from the whole, proclaiming that within it is your kingdom, where God can enter not. Within this kingdom the ego rules, and cruelly. ²And to defend this little speck of dust it bids you fight against the universe. ³This fragment of your mind is such a tiny part of it that, could you but appreciate the whole, you would see instantly that it is like the smallest sunbeam to the sun, or like the faintest ripple on the surface of the ocean. ⁴In its amazing arrogance, this tiny sunbeam has decided it is the sun; this almost imperceptible ripple hails itself as the ocean. ⁵Think how alone and frightened is this little thought, this infinitesimal illusion, holding itself apart against the universe. ⁶The sun becomes the sunbeam’s “enemy” that would devour it, and the ocean terrifies the little ripple and wants to swallow it. Yet neither sun nor ocean is even aware of all this strange and meaningless activity. ²They merely continue, unaware that they are feared and hated by a tiny segment of themselves. ³Even that segment is not lost to them, for it could not survive apart from them. ⁴And what it thinks it is in no way changes its total dependence on them for its being. ⁵Its whole existence still remains in them. ⁶Without the sun the sunbeam would be gone; the ripple without the ocean is inconceivable. Such is the strange position in which those in a world inhabited by bodies seem to be. ²Each body seems to house a separate mind, a disconnected thought, living alone and in no way joined to the Thought by which it was created. ³Each tiny fragment seems to be self-contained, needing another for some things, but by no means totally dependent on its one Creator for everything; needing the whole to give it any meaning, for by itself it does mean nothing. ⁴Nor has it any life apart and by itself. Like to the sun and ocean your Self continues, unmindful that this tiny part regards itself as you. ²It is not missing; it could not exist if it were separate, nor would the whole be whole without it. ³It is not a separate kingdom, ruled by an idea of separation from the rest. ⁴Nor does a fence surround it, preventing it from joining with the rest, and keeping it apart from its Creator. ⁵This little aspect is no different from the whole, being continuous with it and at one with it. ⁶It leads no separate life, because its life _is_ the oneness in which its being was created. Do not accept this little, fenced-off aspect as yourself. ²The sun and ocean are as nothing beside what you are. ³The sunbeam sparkles only in the sunlight, and the ripple dances as it rests upon the ocean. ⁴Yet in neither sun nor ocean is the power that rests in you. ⁵Would you remain within your tiny kingdom, a sorry king, a bitter ruler of all that he surveys, who looks on nothing yet who would still die to defend it? ⁶This little self is not your kingdom. ⁷Arched high above it and surrounding it with love is the glorious whole, which offers all its happiness and deep content to every part. ⁸The little aspect that you think you set apart is no exception. Love knows no bodies, and reaches to everything created like itself. ²Its total lack of limit _is_ its meaning. ³It is completely impartial in its giving, encompassing only to preserve and keep complete what it would give. ⁴In your tiny kingdom you have so little! ⁵Should it not, then, be there that you would call on love to enter? ⁶Look at the desert-dry and unproductive, scorched and joyless-that makes up your little kingdom. ⁷And realize the life and joy that love would bring to it from where it comes, and where it would return with you.

[@slyjokerg]

Please explain how a thought process could exist without a brain.

[@realitycheck1231]

@@slyjokerg We obviously think that a thought process cannot exist without a brain because we have brains. This doesn't mean that it's the only way a thought process exists. AI's have a thought process but don't have brains. We are evolved animals. How would we know what can and cannot exist? Our brains alone cannot produce a thought without our senses, so it's not primarily the brain that produces thought, it's our senses that send information to the brain without which there could be no thoughts in our "brains". Our senses are also very limited, which is why scientists rely on mathematics. Explain how we would know for sure what can and cannot exist with our limited sense perceptions sending signals to our limited brains?

[@slyjokerg]

​@@realitycheck1231 ---> POSTED: **We obviously think that a thought process cannot exist without a brain because we have brains.** 1. What "we" think is that there is no evidence that thoughts exist absent brains, which means there is no reason to believe that they do or even can exist outside of brains. Not having a reason to believe X and lacking belief in X is not the same as believing X is not true. You need to understand that distinction. 2. What I asked was for you to explain how a thought process even could exist without a brain. You didn't even try to do it. **This doesn't mean that it's the only way a thought process exists.** Again, there is no evidence that it can exist any other way, so there is no basis on which to conclude that it does or even can. **AI's have a thought process but don't have brains.** You are now conflating what a brain does and is with what manufactured electronic products do. They aren't the same. That isn't a thought process. **We are evolved animals.** All animals are evolved. **How would we know what can and cannot exist?** Again, you are straw manning. I didn't say that we know everything that can and can't exist. Not knowing that a thought process can or can't exist absent a brain doesn't justify believing it does, or even can. **Our brains alone cannot produce a thought without our senses, so it's not primarily the brain that produces thought...** The brain 100% produce the thought. No other part of your body thinks. **...it's our senses that send information to the brain without which there could be no thoughts in our "brains".** 1. Putting "brains" in quotes there is laughable. Brains DO actually exist. There is no need for a figurative representation. 2. Thoughts happen all the time without input from our senses. You are speaking nonsense. The fact that input from our senses does often affect our thoughts doesn't mean that no thoughts occur absent such input. **Our senses are also very limited, which is why scientists rely on mathematics.** Scientists rely on far more than just mathematics, but regardless, you just said nothing that did anything to even address the topic of thought processes existing without a brain. **Explain how we would know for sure what can and cannot exist with our limited sense perceptions sending signals to our limited brains?** Yet again, no one said that we know everything that can and can't exist. The issue is that there is no evidence that thoughts can exist absent a brain, despite your obvious desperation to think that it can happen.

[@realitycheck1231]

@@slyjokerg Developments in physics suggest the non-existence of time is an open possibility, and one that we should take seriously. Time is not real - it is a human construct to help us differentiate between now and our perception of the past. The concept of time is simply an illusion made up of human memories, everything that has ever been and ever will be is happening right now. That is the theory according to a group of esteemed scientists who aim to solve one of the universe’s mysteries. We live in an illusion of time, what makes you think everything you sense and think is real? Reality exists outside of time, because time and space are one illusion, which takes different forms. If it's been projected beyond your mind you think of it as time. The nearer it is brought to where it is, the more you think of it in terms of space. Scientists can't even advance without theories which haven't been proven yet. What you are suggesting is that scientists should not speculate at all, and everything should remain stagnant.

[@nypala]

A microphone cannot hear.

[@kitstamat9356]

If you attribute all the powers of the soul to the body, the inevitable conclusion will be that there is no soul.

[@inplainview1]

*sigh* Wow, I'm actually impressed at how fundamentally this misunderstands the soul.

you forgot to provide your amazing theory on the topic

[@inplainview1]

I owe you, and these people, nothing.

@@inplainview1 except for whining about the video, apparently

[@inplainview1]

Or using the comments section exactly as intended. Though it's not surprising that someone with limited intellect such as yourself wouldn't be able to properly recognize that. It's ok, once you graduate past being able to compose sentences, and into composing paragraphs, complex abstract concepts such as the ability to discern what constitutes ayoutube comment will become much easier. 😉

[@CesarClouds]

Whats a soul?

[@evaadam3635]

Soul is your AWARENESS who is a non-physical entity that only you yourself know exists because you experience it, being fully aware..

[@CesarClouds]

@@evaadam3635 You know that how?

[@evaadam3635]

​@@CesarCloudsno one, not even science, can see, touch, smell, hear, or taste Awarenes which fits the definition of a soul - a non-physical entity...

[@CesarClouds]

@@evaadam3635 Do you mean self-awareness?

[@evaadam3635]

@@CesarClouds self-awareness is a misconception because an observing Subject can not be the object being observed.... this means that a Subject can not directly be aware of itself unless through its reflection where this reflection becomes the object to be observed... ... and you only know Awareness exists because you are fully aware of the things around you, and not because you observe it directly... it is Awareness that fits the definition of a spirit, ghost, or soul that I believe is a free split of the Holy Spirit..

[@playthe777]

We need a body to feel separate from everything that is that is what we really are.

[@domini1331]

Soul is what the body is not. We have some knowledge about the body. But, nobody has any knowledge of the properties of the soul, including its existence. Apparently, the soul exists only in our beliefs. One thing is clear - the soul cannot communicate with the body.

[@evaadam3635]

"Being Aware with Free Will to Choose what to Believe" is the power or the supernatural properties of your soul that can not be the natural property of physical matter enslaved by natural laws...

[@jairofonseca1597]

What makes matter alive, then ?

[@bustinjieber2673]

How do you mean?

[@jairofonseca1597]

@@bustinjieber2673 animated matter is quite different from inanimate matter, this difference we call soul, an indicative of life.

[@slyjokerg]

Sounds like you need to go back to grade school science class.

[@jairofonseca1597]

@@slyjokerg tell us, then ... what makes matter alive ?

[@slyjokerg]

@@jairofonseca1597 Grow up. No one is going to entertain your childish trolling.

[@evaadam3635]

"Do Souls Exist?" The FREEDOM to decide what good, better, best, or right choice to make among many choices, IS NOT A PROPERTY of "physical matter enslaved by natural laws" but the property or power of the Supernatural Soul... Your Consciousness or Awareness that NO ONE can see, touch, smell, hear, or taste is a Non-Physical Entity that fits the definition of a spirit, ghost, or soul whose existence can only be experienced by yourself... your Awareness with Free Will to Choose is your free immortal soul that I believe is a free split of the Holy Spirit... And because your "Awareness with Free Choice" can not be defined as natural but supernatural, it is only logical to believe that its Origin is a Supernatural SOURCE, rather than believing that your Consciousness is a product of the Explosion of Unconscious NOTHING ( Bigbang)... ..so. have sincere faith in a loving GOD that you may receive the light that can clear up your confusion.. it won't cost you a cent to choose to believe.... do it before it is too late..

[@aiya5777]

using big words won't make your brain bigger

[@simonhibbs887]

@@aiya5777 How about SHOUTING in nice big capital LETTERS?

[@evaadam3635]

@@aiya5777 it has nothing to do with my brain but has to do with helping you see the light to save your soul..

[@evaadam3635]

​@@simonhibbs887 big capital letters are for hopefully waking up those who insist they are just unaccountable robots programmed by nature like you..

[@jbasfilhful]

Not a chance a soul could see.... Kkkkkkk. Just 2 words. NDE experiences.

are delusions

[@alexale5488]

another close minded biased atheist

@@alexale5488 going straight to the ad hom. must be a christian.

[@jbasfilhful]

@@alexale5488 I was sarcastic. I am Spiritist.

[@jbasfilhful]

Sure.

[@sujok-acupuncture9246]

When somebody dies suddenly or in an accident, he doesn't know he is dead. For a little while he feels stunned and bewildered to see that he is separated from his body, maybe, something has gone wrong somewhere. It happens because inside the body nothing really dies except that the soul leaves the body. Not a few, but the majority of souls feel utterly confused and confounded soon after their death. No one can figure out why his family members are weeping and crying, why there is so much grief all around, because he feels as much alive as before, except that his body is a little separate from him. It is the body that gives him a sense of continuity, because it is the medium of all his associations with the past. Only meditative people, those who have experienced deep meditation can escape being pulled and bewildered, because they know that they are separate from their bodies. Soon after cremation or burial of a dead body the soul is gradually freed from its past memories and associations. It is like we gradually forget our dreams. It is on the reckoning of time taken by different kinds of souls that we have different death rites for our dead. Some people, particularly children take only three days to forget their past associations. Most others take thirteen days; so some communities in the East have thirteen-day long death rites. There are a few souls - souls with very powerful memories - who take a year's time for this purpose. Because of them, some of our death rites are spread over a full year. Three to thirteen days are the general rule, and very few souls survive without bodies for a full year; most of them are reborn with new bodies within a short time. Osho, from the book, "krishna :The man and his philosophy".

[@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038]

Get with the reality, man, no one cites Rajneesh, the Cadillac Con Man, anymore!

[@sujok-acupuncture9246]

​@@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038 on what basis did you tell him a con man.

[@sujok-acupuncture9246]

​@@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038 Con man ? You may learn ethical behavior first...

[@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038]

When someone dies they are no longer alive to be "stunned or bewildered", no working sensory organs, no operating brain able to perceive anything. There is no longer a "he" or a "she', an "I"! Where do you idiots get off making these absurd statements as though they're fact when they are completely devoid of same?! It seems you are the one who's stunned & bewildered.

[@slyjokerg]

Demonstrate that anything you just claimed is true.

[@bustinjieber2673]

The way we see, hear, think etc all depend on the brain, if the brain stops those things stop. So how can there be a soul?

[@dragossorin85]

There could exist computation deep in the quantum realm thus can't be rulled out iet

[@ΕμμανουηλΠετρουλακης-ψ5λ]

This man needs asap a serious metaphysical anslysis. Super dogmatically mechanistic materialist thinking.

[@kallianpublico7517]

There it is. Is existence modal? The body, with a soul, “exists” in a subjective, contingent way: one mode. The soul, without a body, exists in another kind of way: another mode? A kind of way that can be accessed? Accessed through what? Are the Buddhists right? Can the soul be accessed only when the mind/intelligence/subjective self is turned off? Is there a “consciousness” that only an “empty” mind has access to? Is that why “soul” music is so distinct from other kinds of music? Is math another artifact of the soul? Or are all the differences and distinctions solely artifacts of the embodied consciousness? Totally detached from the soul.

[@obiwanduglobi6359]

The existence of a pink unicorn is realistic in the same way. Sheer fantasy.

[@kallianpublico7517]

@@obiwanduglobi6359 Oh no, my deluded friend. Purely an amalgam of embodied consciousness: horse+horn+pink. Now ask yourself what conscious impression gives you number. Are numbers an amalgam of conscious impressions? If not then from “where” did they come? Are numbers “Sheer fantasy”?

[@obiwanduglobi6359]

@@kallianpublico7517 Deluded people calling others deluded is a running gag!

[@kallianpublico7517]

@@obiwanduglobi6359 What’s funny? Did I offend you with my deluded comment? Didn’t you know your opinions would be challenged on this site? That’s the point: arguing your case. When you compared my opinion to pink unicorns 🦄, how did you think I would respond? Go find someone else to drive by troll.

[@obiwanduglobi6359]

@@kallianpublico7517 Challanging opinions has nothing to do with devaluation. Folks are using devaluation to hide the fact that they basically have no argument. Do you have any empirical data substantiating your exceptional ideas?

[@littlejerrythecagefighter1163]

Lomell's NDE research says we can see, feel, think, without a living body.

[@thenonphysical]

Is the person a soul? Yes, if you define it as consciousness. We are consciousness. He assumes that the body creates the soul (creates consciousness). That's a wrong assumption. What do you need a body for? A: To experience this game, this virtual reality. The brain doesn't create vision. Vision is a feature of our souls. He assumes that the mind requires the brain, instead of the brain being just a constraint for the mind as it really is. We are in a simulation, the brain is a simulation too, but we us consciousness are not simulated, we are the players, which reside in the nonphysical.

[@evaadam3635]

For Atheists or Materialists who defines existence through what their LIMITED physical senses can reach, the soul does not exist because they can not see it... ...but according to their cats and dogs who can sense a ghost, "our masters are just suffering from sensory inadequacies"..😊

[@TurinTuramber]

Atheists and materialists are limited but everyone else is not?

[@Trevor_Green]

Oh? Don't you think this is the exact same inference that the human brain is associating to the actions of the animal? Would it not be reasonable to assume that the only people that believe there such things as ghosts or some people/animals being in tune to recognize the supernatural are simply inferring their experience outwardly based on their internal biases? There has never once been a single measurement objectively performed that has indicated a ghost is an actual thing. There's been lots of flawed measurements that are easily dismissed. Remember an atheist is simply a rejection of some assertion that a God or Gods exists, that's it. they tend to be skeptical about everything though so not believing in ghosts is likely to occur in an atheist's perspective

[@MrMichiel1983]

@@TurinTuramber No, they actually acknowledge that humans can't perceive ghosts... since only cats and dogs can... Right, OP?

[@evaadam3635]

@@TurinTuramber ..well, others understand that their physical senses are LIMITED so not to hastily rule out possible existence beyond what you can not see... if you are searching for the truth, close-mindedness is an awful way to do it...

[@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038]

Do you have a shred of evidence that supports both your claim of the existence of ghosts or that felines & canines can "sense" them? And do you actually have any knowledge of the capabilities of a trained & educated mind? I think not from your insulting generalization. Signed: A successful & educated dog trainer who knows for sure & without a doubt no dog or cat ever communicated such nonsense to you. Nor would they even know what the word "ghost" even means. It is you who is limited by your insistence on putting your ill used imagination above facts & truth. Garbage in, garbage out

[@tedgrant2]

Do unclean spirits cause mental illness ? (Mark 1:23)

[@edwardprokopchuk3264]

The word that is used for “soul” in the bible is “psyche”. This would be SO simple if we just properly translated things. We’ve been studying the “soul” for hundreds of years and literally have a whole scientific field for this matter.

[@obiwanduglobi6359]

A whole scientific field without the slightest evidence or proof for something like a "soul".

[@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038]

So God was a Greek? "The only Hebrew word traditionally translated "soul" (nephesh) in English-language Bibles refers to a living, breathing conscious body, rather than to an immortal soul. In the New Testament, the Greek word traditionally translated "soul" (ψυχή) "psyche", has substantially the same meaning as the Hebrew, without reference to an immortal soul." You people figure you can just make stuff up & it will pass as fact. Pathetic as well as dishonest!

[@edwardprokopchuk3264]

@@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038 I didn’t mention anything about an “immortal” soul 🤷‍♂️ The Bible actually says that souls die, so I’m not sure why this idea is so prevalent in Christianity. Probably related to the parable of the rich man and Lazarus.

[@simonhibbs887]

​@@edwardprokopchuk3264 Christianity spread like wildfire among Greek communities, and Greek speakers. That's why all Paul's epistles are in Greek. For a long time Greeks had been interested in Judaism due to it's monotheism. Groups of Greeks would gather round Synagogues after prayers to discuss religion and philosophy with the Rabbis. When Christianity came along with it's inclusivity, it became hugely popular with these people. Of course they brought many of their philosophical, and some spiritual beliefs along with them. That's why early Christian theology is basically a wholesale import of Plato and Aristotle.

[@mazyarkanani6708]

For those with faith, no evidence is needed. For those without, no evidence is good enough. Faith comes from your “heart”, not your mind. Thats what materialists deny to their bitter end

[@Earthad23]

They’ve habituated a miracle and forgotten who they are.

[@obiwanduglobi6359]

I can't even judge whether it's good enough or not. Because there is no evidence at all. Bring it up, bring it up!

hearts are just blood pumps. faith is a type of thought and comes from your brain.

[@Earthad23]

Consciousness is not the same thing as states of the brain. When you understand that you will see the truth.

@@Earthad23 Oh really? Well have your consciousness float into the kitchen and make me a sandwich then.

[@mockupguy3577]

First define it in a reasonably precise way. There is nothing that suggests that any part of our personality or consciousness continues to exist after death.

[@ritornelloandrefrain]

@@saigopala Except everything Lakoff just said...

[@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038]

@@saigopala You can lead a horse to water... but a mule can be quite stubborn. And the word "Also" cannot conjoin 2 differing factors that are in opposition to one another.

[@raajrajan1956]

Sankhya upanishad of Hindus answers all objections.

[@sunyata4974]

All is an illusion, including souls.

[@dipakshah8001]

Body is just manifestation. Sole is everything. George! Just awake form this and find out that who is that who is questioning the existence of sole. Well this is the hierarchy that it is sole itself that doubting. Because it's characteristics of sole. It gives equal power to thieves and police, right and wrong. This is the reason why good ang bad both exists. It is vision behind eyes, listener of ears recieving sound waves, sence of skin's mechanical touch, feeling senses of nose and tongue by just touching of some chemicals. If you look deeply it is only touching of materials with eachother like Photon to eyes, sound waves caring atoms to eardrum, molecules to nose receptors and tongue receptor and touching of anything to skin but it is sole which creates knowledge of sences from this. You yourself are sole. You caught up in the body this is the reason you are limiting yourself. Just wake up!!!!!

[@AUSCarLover]

This body is designed based on our soul to exist in the material realm. There is no God, but the soul or consciousness is the source of everything. The reason randomness could lead to such a high level of evolution is because it reflects the master consciousness of this reality. We are split from it, and we come into this world to experience, learn, gain new knowledge, and become better individuals. In terms of quantum physics, it is based on information and how that information transfers throughout reality. The material world is the result of consciousness interacting between atoms. We were created through this mechanism as naturally as possible. That's why, when someone leaves the body, they can still see and hear everything, even if they are declared dead-because once information is created as our being, we live on, even when the body is gone.

[@alexale5488]

You can't know there is no God. Perhaps God is that source consciousness you talk about, or the first consciousness to ever arise.

[@AUSCarLover]

@@alexale5488 It could be God, but not as humans have traditionally defined it. God could be all of us, as we share a collective consciousness. Those with a high level of consciousness may feel and understand others as if they were themselves, able to connect with anyone and embody goodness-even if they have never learned about or heard of God before. Religion, however, can suppress the right brain's understanding, which may suggest that religion is not truly from God. A lack of understanding reduces one's thinking to that of AI or a robot. So, rather than relying on the teachings of any religion, seek your own understanding and consciousness-these are the closest reflections of what God truly is.

[@gsr4535]

Soul is just a more "romantic" name for the mind.

[@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038]

Nope, it has it's own meaning & likely predates the word mind: :The word "mind" has its origins in Old English, where it was spelled "gemynd" and meant "memory, remembrance; thought, purpose; consciousness, intellect, intention"".

[@gsr4535]

@@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038 Yeah, yeah, predates. You mean it comes from a time when 99% of the people were illiterate and believed in magic. Hahahahaha

[@alexale5488]

@@gsr4535 You're not worth talking to.

[@paineoftheworld]

I like that. And the mind tells itself a story of romance about itself. Love it.

[@domini1331]

​@evaadam3635 Believing has nothing to do with the soul or the religion. It is purely a physical activity. Even animals do believe. A new born baby believes that sucking milk is essential, but may not consider it as necessary to believe in religious rituals. Over a period of time, the belief turns into trust, when the baby realises that things are happening as per the belief and discards those beliefs that fail the test. Beliefs are driven by instincts and not by experiences.

[@evaadam3635]

It is obvious that you do not understand the difference between natural physical laws and the laws made by imperfect men that can be broken... Physical Laws, being NATURAL, can not be broken which means physical matter can not make a choice on its own, nor can even have time to do it, while being enslaved or driven by natural physical laws ALL THE TIME... so, animals natural instincts are not free choices but just driven by natural laws beyond animals' control... Your Physics becomes a joke if it allows physical matter to have free time to make a choice on its own to believe in GOD that defies your material science garbage... please stop being funny...its embarrassing..

[@thenonphysical]

Wrong, wrong, wrong, but what can you expect from another materialist?

accuracy

[@praveenvarma9107]

So how does one explain out of the body experiences, telepathy etc ?? Which are all proven facts..

[@bustinjieber2673]

Telepathy is proven? Where and whenn?

[@raajrajan1956]

Not fully informed.

[@ansleyrubarb8672]

...You are using some arguments to negate the soul. Suppose living in this minor world as we do, the soul is the link into the Spiritual World. Maybe even the Quantum World which just might be the very next level after we pass from this life. All of the marvelous subjects we have learned, developed, etc. Imagine the amazing new sciences yet to be. How wonderful the discoveries. I am sure when we pass, our gifts, talents, memories will be renewed I also know that when we pass, we will be much more than just a pile of dirt on the floor, respectfully, oldchuck Hotmail... captivus brevis... you tube... Blessings...

[@der_kleine_Toni]

if my soul exist eternal, where was it before I was born?

[@jeffamos9854]

You did not exist before you were born. Your soul does not exist now or after death

[@cwescrab]

Maybe it didn’t exist yet.

[@TheWay-u1n]

Our capacity to grasp I guess would correlate with iq and the given information at hand.. Obviously the all sol would forever be beyond grasp but something to strive towards

[@MarkPatmos]

Human beings might be capable of one day sustaining human consciousness in a virtual reality without a physical body, yet a higher being who created matter is completely limited by matter end of argument?

[@MrMichiel1983]

Soul is what's invariant about your choices in the multiverse. Or in other words, given various starting conditions what you would have done differently with this life. One can imagine that if you'd known more or less about the future, and had more or less resources, you would have chosen a different path accordingly. If one were to know everything, one would have no more choice. But what does that all matter if you don't know more than what you do in this universe? It's just bla bla, right? Well, it still serves as an example that "you" are not the poverty or richness in this or any alleged other life. What makes "you" actually "you", or in other words what lends causally determined matter a "soul" and makes you not a "philosophical zombie", is simply the notion that the clothes you wear in this life (that's a euphemism) are derived from the interface between luck and perseverance. Some people would talk of karma or reincarnation or heaven and hell depending on where they were born, but I prefer to think of infinitesimals and recurrence times. Math and physics can go all meta too. I'll close with a poem if you don't mind; If you'd have two wishes what would they be? The first one should inform the second, you see? Whether this life is the former or latter granted, however... now that's a magic for you to dream.

[@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038]

What "multiverse" ? Proof of any of this nonsensical gibberish?

[@AnaGuillenBachs]

I had a stroke and Iose one side body mobility...Am I not me anymore? (Spoiler alert) Yes, I am.

[@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038]

So? How is this at all relevant to what is being discussed here? And what is this "me" you speak of?

[@AnaGuillenBachs]

@@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038 don't you understand? I'm sorry but I don't have the patience to explain something so simple.

[@Novastar.SaberCombat]

Yes, they do. Unfortunately--and I'm not being cheeky here--not all sentient beings possess them. This includes creatures and animals. You never know which do or do not have them, and obviously, they can "depart" from a creature or person under certain circumstances. 🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨ "Before I start, I must see my end. Destination known, my mind's journey now begins. Upon my chariot, heart and soul's fate revealed. In time, all points converge; hope's strength, resteeled. But to earn final peace at the universe's endless refrain, we must see all in nothingness... before we start again." 🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨ --Diamond Dragons (series)

[@mightyoss]

No

[@gerry4b]

And don’t we use these same metaphors to describe this mans science? How is physics not a metaphor? Physics is not the universe. “The mind has structures” Wow… I gutta remember that one. What collapses the wave form? Well, my dear, the mind has structures.

[@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038]

Nonsense weakly disguised as erudite discourse.

[@gerry4b]

@@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038 So your metaphor requires no proof? An adherent is not a scientist.

[@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038]

@@gerry4b I offered no metaphor! What word or phrase did I apply to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable? Do you even know what a metaphor is? Seems not.

[@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038]

So Gerry runs away & hides his absurd misguided comments when confronted by one who can smell troll turds a mile off. LOL

[@gerry4b]

@@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038 Such a thin skinned ignoramus... was your "Incel's Anonymous" meeting canceled?

[@peterroberts4509]

No one knows

[@evaadam3635]

You know that your Awareness exists, you just do not notice that it is your free aware immortal soul...

[@justinhartnell6779]

This man insists on having no imagination.

[@yngvesognen1092]

NDEs strongly indicate that there's a soul.

[@aiya5777]

NDE doesn't mean anything

[@yngvesognen1092]

@@aiya5777, it does to many people.

[@asyetundetermined]

@@yngvesognen1092so does astrology

[@alexale5488]

@@asyetundetermined don't compare nonsense to scientifically and medically studied phenomena like NDEs

[@syedhasan8181]

Ask someone who can remember a past life in your show with independent proof of that life. It is available. Or is it a big no, no for this show? I can remember myself floating over my dead body and then being born again from my mother's womb. Theories should be there to explain these extra-ordinary experiences. But it seems that the theorists are just keen to explain their own limited experience and insist that there are no other experiences possible :)

[@asyetundetermined]

You should write a book.

[@simonhibbs887]

I don't for a moment deny that some people do have these experiences. What isn't clear is that these experiences show what people like yourself claim they show.

[@wthomas5697]

Give me a break. Whatever it is that went through your mind has nothing to do with reality.

[@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038]

@@simonhibbs887 It is clear that said experience show nothing factual at all. These claimed experiences are simply imagined or invented & show nothing of any particular relevance to fact, although a decent psychiatrist might find them useful in analysis.

[@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038]

@@asyetundetermined Yeah, a childish fantasy book that's never printed.

[@quixodian]

Neural reductionism from the first word.

[@nobodynobody4389]

Yes

[@JagadguruSvamiVegananda]

Sings: “It ain’t necessarily so...” 🎤

[@peweegangloku6428]

Soul from what point of view? This discussion is certainly not talking about soul from the Bible's point of view. It is clear in the Bible that soul refers to the individual and/or his future life prospect. How much clearer should Genesis 2:7 be when it says that man was formed from the ground "and man became a LIVING SOUL." The man himself "BECAME" a soul. The Scripture does not say 'came to HAVE a living soul," but rather became a living soul. The Bible also says that the soul dies. The soul is not immortal.(Ezekiel 18:4). If you're claiming that the Bible teaches immortal soul, that is a ridiculous misunderstanding of what the Bible teaches. What the Bible teaches though is that there is something called the "breath of life" which God "breathed" into his creation and from then on was inherited from parent creatures. The Bible also says that the only primary source of this "breath of life" is God himself. Psalm 36:9 says, "With you (God) is the source of life." God "breathed" this "breath of life" in that it came from within God himself. Something precious (life) that only he possesses is what he has shared with us. What we should be concerned about now in Physics, Chemistry and Biology is this - what is this breath of life? What is it like? What kind of force is it. How does it work? How does it activate a nonliving chemical substance into a living one? It certainly appears to be different from all other physical forces that humans have captured and worked with in their laboratory and fields.

[@simonhibbs887]

The translation of 'nephesh chayyah' as soul is not even properly controversial, it's just plain wrong. In Hebrew it properly means a living person, more literally something like 'body with breath'. The association of the word nephesh with something like spirit came around a thousand years after Genesis was written, and it is not translated that way in Jewish translations of the Torah into English. Many modern Christian translations use the 'living being' interpretation, including for example the Evangelical Heritage Version and the NASB. References to the soul don't appear in the bible until the New Testament, specifically in those portions originally written in Greek where they use the word 'psyche', as it's a Greek import into Christian theology. The majority of early Christian converts were Greek, or culturally Greek, and their philosophical and some spiritual beliefs infused into their new religion. This is why early Christian theology is copy-pasted from Plato and Aristotle, and has very little to do with Judaism of the time.

[@michaelmckinney7240]

How can any reasonable person take seriously anything written in the bible when it steadfastly asserts silly fairy tales like Noah's Ark, or the Garden of Eden? The bible is poison to the human mind. It undermines credible faith in God with it's childish dogma.

[@peweegangloku6428]

I agree that translating nephesh (Hebrew language) and psykhe' (Greek language) from the Bible into English as soul is misleading. However since many older translations have it that way, to reason with those who depend on such translations to understand what is written in the Bible, it is more practical to draw attention to the contextual meaning of nephesh or psykhe, translated as soul in those translations. The subject of this episode is soul. That is why I, on purpose, referenced a translation that uses soul in place of nephesh. All said, this is an example of how misinformed persons assume that the Bible teaches certain things that in actuality are not in the Bible. Another thing to take note of is that the early Christians were directly warned against adapting philosophical ideas in any shape or form. Example of this is found at Colossians chapter 2 verse 8: "Look out that no one takes you captive by means of the philosophy and empty deception according to human tradition, according to the elementary things of the world and not according to Christ." So true Christianity was never corrupted by Greek philosophy nor by any other one. Certainly the creator would make sure to protect his written communication from such corrupting influence.

[@simonhibbs887]

@@peweegangloku6428 I don’t see how you can say ‘true Christianity’ was never corrupted by Greek Philosophy. Firstly I never said anything about corrupted, I’d say influenced. However it’s clear from a reading of Neoplatonism or Aristotelian philosophy, early Christian theology is utterly infused by it. Early Christian theologians , and even theologians today reference Plato and Aristotle constantly, and adapted their ideas wholesale. Unless you think there is actually a separate ‘true’ Christian theology that exists that doesn’t have these ideas, and is purely influenced by elements only found in the Judaic tradition.

[@peweegangloku6428]

@@simonhibbs887 Sure! That is why I said true Christianity. Jesus Christ himself is quoted to have said this: "Not everyone saying to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the Kingdom of the heavens, but only the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will. Many will say to me in that day: ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and expel demons in your name, and perform many powerful works in your name?’ And then I will declare to them: ‘I never knew you! Get away from me, you workers of lawlessness." - Matthew 7:21 - 23.

[@martyabeln6167]

He is a materialist and atheist.

[@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038]

So? What's your point? Do you have a problem discerning between what is real & verifiable & what is mythological archaic nonsense founded solely on fear of the unknown & woeful ignorance?

[@gerry4b]

@@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038 I Think someone’s faith is feeling threatened.

[@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038]

@@gerry4b What are you on about? What faith have I demonstrated with the above comment? Or are you sorely lacking any ability to read & comprehend. I am a rational atheist who was University major in Comparative Religion & the History of Religious Thought & Belief Systems. While you are just a mindless troll.

[@gerry4b]

@@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038 Pffft...

[@gerry4b]

@@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038 Pffft...

[@raleighwalter4250]

Of course!

[@JagadguruSvamiVegananda]

Are you ABSOLUTELY certain of that? 🤨

[@obiwanduglobi6359]

The burdon of proof lies upon those who assert certain things. I stay relaxed as always. No spirit, no soul, no wild mumbo jumbo at all so far.

[@JagadguruSvamiVegananda]

@@obiwanduglobi6359 spirit/Spirit: This term is generally used in reference to the ESSENTIAL nature of a human being (and also of a non-human animal or even of a plant in some religious traditions and metaphysical systems). Although some Theologians use the terms “soul” and “spirit” interchangeably, those from the Abrahamic traditions (Christianity, Islam and Judaism) usually consider “soul“ to be a living being (a human person) whilst the term “spirit" is that part of the person that is non-temporal (the essential self). The lower case form of these words (spirit and soul) is approximately equivalent to the lower case form of the Sanskrit word “ātman”, and obviously, the upper-case form (Soul) refers to “Ātman” or “Paramātman” (“Supersoul“ or “Over-soul“, in English). Cf. “ātman/Ātman”. Therefore, in the considered opinion of this author, the various terms denoting the realm of eternality, such as “The Ground of Being”, “The Unified Field”, “Ultimate Reality”, “Brahman”, and “The Tao”, are fundamentally SYNONYMOUS with those terms referring to the essence of the human being, such as “soul”, “spirit”, “self/Self”, and as mentioned already, “ātman/Ātman”, and “Paramātman”. In fact, one of the four so-called “Great Sayings” (“mahāvākya”, in Sanskrit) of the Upanishads, “ayam ātmā brahma”, very succinctly says as much: “this self is The Unlimited”, or “the soul is The Supersoul”, or “the person is The Totality of Existence”. However, it seems that the overwhelming majority of religionists who use the words “spirit” or “soul”, use them in reference to a separate OBJECT (e.g. “The spirit of man”, “The human spirit”, “We are spirits in the material world”, “I am not a body, but a spirit/soul”). According to my research, most religionists believe that this OBJECT (call it what you will) joins with the human body at the time of conception (or sometimes at birth) and that, upon the demise of the body, this OBJECT travels to another location (either heaven, hell, or purgatory) or else enters into the body of another living being (either a human, non-human animal, or a plant). Some Theologies postulate that the soul and/or the spirit may be mortal and, depending on the moral disposition of the particular person in question, can perish at the time of death (or even during one’s lifetime, known as a spiritual death, or sometime after death, known as “death by hellfire”). Depending on their unique theologies, religionists assume that this OBJECT is located in various places in the human body, even though at conception, there are no developed body parts in which this fictitious OBJECT could possibly be positioned! Some believe that the entire body is pervaded by the soul/spirit, some that it is located in the pituitary gland, or situated in the heart. The word “spirit”, along with the terms "soul”, “truth”, “ego”, and “love” (among others), is undoubtedly one of the most misunderstood and misused words in the English language. In at least ninety percent of the instances in which the word “spirit” (and especially the term “spiritual”) is used in common discourse, a more apposite word could be (and should be) used in its stead. “Spirit” simply refers to the SUBJECT, as opposed to objective reality, and more accurately, the Subject of all subjects (and objects).

[@monporoshneog4725]

His defining properties of the body like hearing, emotions etc which is under the dimensions of Time and Space and the Soul is beyond any dimensions, So his understanding is completely a ignorant one.

[@craigswanson8026]

Of course not, no.

[@slyjokerg]

LOL. There is zero evidence for any such thing as a soul. Grow up.

[@craigswanson8026]

Complete gibberish about magical thinking.

[@ghaderpashayee8334]

Pure dogmatic materialistic point of view!

[@ansleyrubarb8672]

...Gentlemen, when we die, we enter into a new reality, and all of our learned knowledge will be available for us to experience our new found reality, respectfully, ordinarychuck hotmail... captivus brevis...you tube...Blessings...we all have different fingerprints & GOD Loves you. You will know & experience our New Found Reality...

[@jairofonseca1597]

Obviously souls do exist, anima ... that is what makes matter alive, animated.

[@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038]

Obviously you haven't clue one! Especially when it comes to the use of the word "obviously". There is nothing obvious, nor factual, in this opinion of yours.

[@jairofonseca1597]

@@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038 what makes matter alive, then ?

[@jairofonseca1597]

@@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038 what make matter alive, then ?

[@jairofonseca1597]

@@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038 what makes matter alive, then ?

[@jairofonseca1597]

@@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038 what makes matter alive, then ?

[@bardkuzniadram6193]

Yes! Sure like unicorns!

[@maspoetry1]

I'm finishing his book "metaphors we live by" I wonder what others think and how it fits with other theories like Chomsky's (if they are comparable in any way.)

[@maspoetry1]

I found his book interesting.

[@perathambkk]

:D

[@jonnymoney1071]

I love the thought experiments 😮 But nobody ever gives a straight answer 😂 Love your channel ❤

[@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038]

Lakoff gave an extremely straight answer, you simple don't have the intellect to understand it.

[@gerry4b]

@@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038 An absurd response from an ignoramus. Argument via insult is pretty easy. I recommend everyone practice it.

[@FiftyShadesOfDave6603]

Let's just be honest and say I don't know. Noone knows as there's no evidence souls exist or not 🤔

[@Sherifaga]

No, your perception of soul is too narrow. Pity

[@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038]

A scientific view which totally trumps any nonsensical ill informed opinion of yours.

[@MrMichiel1983]

@@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038 but he made no reference at all to his opinion other than "narrow"... So OP boringly never argued as to why they think that, but you do proceed to claim the veracity of something as unfalsifiable as the soul over something non-existent as OP's line of reasoning.

[@stephen-he4iw]

what am I going to do with a soul anyways? souls are boring. booo! souls!

[@evaadam3635]

A cold dark emptiness (hell) is worse than boring... your lost soul was sent here to save it from returning to hell through faith in a loving God...

[@ghaderpashayee8334]

Loool

[@AABC-hb7mt]

i wish, but no, i don’t think so.

[@wthomas5697]

No, souls do not exist. It's a stupid question.

[@jbasfilhful]

NDE

[@AnaGuillenBachs]

Two men talking 😅 ...They will never be able to understand the cycle of life/death/life that women embody each month through the menstrual cycle...

[@AnaGuillenBachs]

Why when we die does our whole life pass us by when all our neurons are activated? What is the evolutionary function of that unless it was recorded in an intangible place?

[@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038]

Seriously?! Too funny. Just another feminist axe grinding here.

[@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038]

@@AnaGuillenBachs Non factual gobble-dee-gook with no basis in fact!

[@GlennKarg-uu4uz]

No they dont